We view the practice of law as a vocation of service. In keeping with this perspective, we have developed principles below to define our intended method of advocacy:
Our first goal in any matter is to resolve the dispute immediately and at the lowest possible cost to our clients, in money, time, and human strain. We treat negotiation and alternative dispute resolution as primary tools rather than alternatives to "real" lawyering. Where the parties are willing, we work toward settlements that address the underlying interests on both sides, not just the legal positions. When resolution is not possible, we advocate diligently for our clients in court, but we always look for opportunities to facilitate direct resolution.
We work to narrow disputes rather than widen them. We confer in good faith before taking matters to the court, grant reasonable extensions and accommodations, and deal with opposing counsel directly instead of through posturing. We keep these channels open for a practical reason, not a sentimental one: it is what lets a case settle when the moment comes, and it spares our clients the expense of fights that benefit no one but the lawyers.
We continually strive to work in a consistent, methodical fashion, and to refine and optimize our systems and procedures. We are constantly looking for ways to make recurring work leaner and faster without compromising quality. Our firm's goal is exceptional work delivered at a reasonable cost and the best possible outcome given the resources available.
In the pursuit of efficiency, we have developed internal legal forms, automated document formatting, and an extensive internal research library. We use a custom-built open-source case management system, which the firm also sponsors. We subscribe to premium legal research services and rapidly adopt new research and AI tools wherever they prove themselves useful. Our ultimate objective is to deliver value well beyond our fee.
Litigation is expensive, slow, and carries real downside risk regardless of the merits. We are candid about the risks, and we keep the client informed about them. Before a client commits to a course, we put the likely cost, timeline, and odds of each option in front of them (including the weaknesses in their own case) and we revisit that assessment as matters develop.
When we litigate, we do so within disciplines we impose on ourselves beyond what the rules require:
We believe these disciplines serve our clients' real interests, not just our principles, because candor and good faith produce the best outcomes.
We believe a fair legal system requires that quality advocacy be accessible, not just affordable to a select few. Because financial barriers should not dictate the strength of a person's voice in court, we dedicate a portion of our practice to bridging the justice gap through alternative and public-interest fee models. For qualifying clients facing hardship, we actively utilize subsidized structures, flexible low-bono arrangements, and statutory fee-shifting options. This allows us to champion meritorious cases that might otherwise go unheard, aligning our resources with our commitment to the public good.